The Great Ruck Debate.

[kruddler]

A good example of how averages can be misleading. The median (midpoint of the data set) and mode (most frequent result) are more informative:

Median: Pitto = 1.5, Tom = 4

Mode: Pitto = 2, Tom = 5

The raw data is:

Pitto: 0 marks per game X 2, 1 mark X 2, 2 marks X 3 and 3 marks X 1

Tom: 0 marks per game X 0, 1 mark per game X 3, 2 marks X 3, 3 marks X 1, 4 marks X 3, 5 marks X 5 and 6 marks X 1

When we have played Pitto and Tom, the latter has played limited minutes as a key forward and he isn't targeted anywhere near as often as Charlie, Harry and Owies.  Tom also rarely gets involved in transferring play and doesn't rack up meaningless uncontested marks.

When we play both TOMs minutes has suffered?
Go back and check your data on that one.
If you want to go head to head, its hard for the reasons we've both outlined.
So thats why i included some other of the best 'solo' rucks for comparison.
For someone with an inability to take a mark, he stacks up pretty well with some of the best.
I suggest if you normalise that out, you'll find that he is even better than those averages suggest.

All i'm saying is you are selling Pittonet short.